Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > VirtualDub, VDubMod & AviDemux

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 5th June 2008, 22:31   #141  |  Link
fbs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 45
I changed it... and 1h has passed since then.. :P still waiting.. hehe what exactly is it doing in this 'deshaking...' stage?

0 0
8000 0
100 100
5 100
fbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 03:49   #142  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
Quote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see the point in doing what you're trying to do. Why would Deshaker be helped by adding interpolated frames?
the interpolated frames are there for a more deeper analyzes on how the camera moves AND the frames help fill the black borders to help give more image of the object than having less frames.
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 07:36   #143  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
fbs, that sounds very strange. What are those numbers?
In the deshaking stage, it calculates how all of the frames should be transformed (but doesn't actually transform them).
If you set all max. correction limits to 100 and leave all smoothness values below 10000, it should be rather quick. How long is your clip?
If you want, you can send me your settings and logfile (maybe privately) and I'll look at it.

Undead Sega, I still don't understand. I would rather say that the interpolated frames probably would make it harder for Deshaker. And I really don't see how they would give more data to use in the borders. They don't cover any "real world data" that isn't already in the real frames.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 20:22   #144  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
it becomes harder because it has more frames to scan.

EDIT: nevermind.
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 18:01   #145  |  Link
fbs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by guth View Post
fbs, that sounds very strange. What are those numbers?
In the deshaking stage, it calculates how all of the frames should be transformed (but doesn't actually transform them).
If you set all max. correction limits to 100 and leave all smoothness values below 10000, it should be rather quick. How long is your clip?
If you want, you can send me your settings and logfile (maybe privately) and I'll look at it.
I'm using 0 for all smoothness except vertical which is 8000
I'm using 100 for all max corrections except vertical which is 5..
My vid was 1h40m long...

What I'm trying to do here is just correct some jumps my VCR produces in almost all frames.. look the logfile:
1663B 0.31 -15.40 0.006 0.99989
1664A -0.65 15.50 0.030 0.99973

15 pixels up then 15 down.. it's this way all over the tape..

With these settings I could correct it.. the problem is the speed :P I'll have to do this for like 20 tapes.. and only the 'Deshaking..' stage is taking 2-3 hours...

can you create an option for it to just work with vertical? both at 1st and 2nd pass? ;p I would gladly test it.. I can be a beta tester lol my msn is fbs [at] brasnet.org

Last edited by fbs; 8th June 2008 at 19:24.
fbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 18:54   #146  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
It would probably be a lot faster if you split your clip into a few parts and processed them individually. The time needed for "deshaking..." unfortunately isn't linear with respect to the clip length. I'm still surprised it takes so long, though.
Again, if you want, you could send me the logfile and settings.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2008, 17:03   #147  |  Link
fbs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by guth View Post
It would probably be a lot faster if you split your clip into a few parts and processed them individually. The time needed for "deshaking..." unfortunately isn't linear with respect to the clip length. I'm still surprised it takes so long, though.
Again, if you want, you could send me the logfile and settings.
I could send it to you.. can you add me on msn? fbs [at] brasnet.org

I'd really like an optimized/upgraded version of your filter

fbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2008, 17:34   #148  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
Didn't you get my reply to your private message?
Please email me the files, to gunnart [at] guthspot.se.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2008, 20:46   #149  |  Link
scharfis_brain
brainless
 
scharfis_brain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,636
@Gunnar:

could you add a progress bar to the 'Deshaking...' popup-window?
Or even more: a counter for the estimated remaing time?

It would be very nice to be able to judge how long the calculation process will take...
__________________
Don't forget the 'c'!

Don't PM me for technical support, please.
scharfis_brain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2008, 19:04   #150  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
Without going into details, I'm afraid it's not quite that simple. I don't really know how long it will take.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th June 2008, 21:53   #151  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
@ Gunnar, even though ow great this filter works for me and many people out there, is there any improvements u would want to consider or is there more work that can be done on your filter?
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 07:38   #152  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
I'm always open for suggestions.
(But I'm a lazy man, so it would have to be something truly awesome! )
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 12:20   #153  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
Quote:
(But I'm a lazy man, so it would have to be something truly awesome! )
Now that doesnt suprise me, hahahaha, but i praise you for admiting it rather than someone else slowly trying to get it out from you :d

anyways, wat im meaning is, the way it is extrapolating to fill the borders, the current state of it, is there any thing more u can do about it? or did u just got it to a certain stage and thought "this looks good enough" ? Not being rude of course.
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 17:42   #154  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
If you mean the extrapolation setting specifically, I think it's quite perfect looking, but very slow.
But if you mean using past and future frames to fill the borders, it could probably be improved a bit. It might happen some day, but then again it might not.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 18:31   #155  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
Now, with you saying that it could improve abit, what would that be exactly may i ask? If u dont mind telling me
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 19:06   #156  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
Maybe doing some kind of local motion compensation that scharfis_brain talked about earlier. I don't know.
But it's kind of impossible to know what's outside a frame at the specific time that frame was shot. Guessing by looking at other frames will simply always look a bit strange under some circumstances.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 19:56   #157  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
i see, so if u were to impliment motion compensation, what difference could we probably see? as opposed to filling black borders with previous frames, or even with the combination.

also, i have read somewhere the super resolution is a very good algorithm for extrapolation.
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 20:19   #158  |  Link
guth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 152
I would obviously still have to take the image data from past and future frames (cause that's where the missing info is).
Seriously, you need to relax a little. I'm most probably not going to implement anything like that. Mostly because I don't think it would look that much better.
As for "super resolution"... believe me, no matter how awesome it is it will never be able to extrapolate a missing head from someone's body.
guth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 20:25   #159  |  Link
Undead Sega
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 713
Quote:
As for "super resolution"... believe me, no matter how awesome it is it will never be able to extrapolate a missing head from someone's body.
oh im very aware of that, but i am just seeing if this filter can seriously be improved or become any better, its just i cannot find the right words at the moment to pass my exact words on. i know it can.
Undead Sega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2008, 17:30   #160  |  Link
Dr.D
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 70
No doubt deshaker is a great tool, big thanks to the author.
Filling borders done very smart too, great feature.
But, I believe, there are people (like me) who are crazy about any artefacts, what filled borders definitely are, regardless of how smart this done. So, I can sacrifize of resolution, cut off borders and have an artefacts free picture.
Here is the problem: how to know how much I should cut off? Now I do some not easy calculations based on 2nd pass parameters, using even trigonometry , and still not sure that no artefacts left.
So, the following feature will be very appreciated. For 2nd pass I'd like to see a mode (let say "cut off borders") with only one option - resolution for output file, and let Deshaker choose optimal parameters for that.
Dr.D is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.